"Revised" termination notice.

I had been officially terminated in NYC and given 30 days notice in writing. However, I have now received a "revised" termination notice (a few of days before my termination would take affect) which has pushed back my termination date by several weeks.

Is this legal? If I want to stick to my previous termination date would I be jeopardizing my previously promised severance package (i.e., would refusing the "revision" be considered quitting).

If any one can provide advice or prior experience on this it would be greatly appreciated, as I only have one day left to make this decision.

Pushed back, as in, they want you to stay longer? It's very possible that your severance package may be compromised. We would have no way of knowing though. You would have to talk to your HR Dept.

Yes they want me to stay additional six weeks or so. However, since this "revision" was made only days before my termination date, I have made other plans that would make it difficult (logistically and financially) to continue with the company. It just seems very unfair that they can fire me and then change their mind at the last minute and potentially snatch back my severance package.

BTW, I have sent an e-mail to my HR rep, but they are notoriously slow in responding.

Thank you for your advice PattyTX.

I'm not saying that it isn't unfair, and you are certainly able to reopen negotiations based on this new information if your employer agrees. All I'm saying is that it is completely up to the company.

pattytx said:

All I'm saying is that it is completely up to the company.

Click to expand...

What is that the "black black take it back" principle of at will employment.

It is up to the contract (if any) the employee handbook, and the provisions of the severance policy and package offered in writing.

If the termination of the relationship as described in the termination letter includes serverance after 30 days, then what grounds would they have to retract this letter, (absent any such right in the letter, contract or policy)?

If what your saying is true then any employer almost would never pay severance. I doubt that they are paying out of kindness or goodwill...

If enough money is at stake, michael_NY should consult with an outside party, up to a lawyer, rather than count on the largess of his HR rep.

What is that the "black black take it back" principle of at will employment. Huh? I don't have a clue what you're referring to.

If the termination of the relationship as described in the termination letter includes serverance after 30 days, then what grounds would they have to retract this letter, (absent any such right in the letter, contract or policy)? Because offering severance is completely voluntary and absent a bonafide contract which obligates the company to specific terms, the employer is free to change the conditions under which they're willing to provide severance as they see fit.

If what your saying is true then any employer almost would never pay severance. I doubt that they are paying out of kindness or goodwill... Those employers who do pay severance do in fact pay it out of goodwill. Believe it or not, employers don't enjoy putting people out of work and jeopardizing their financial security. It's quite common though for some terms to be attached to severance, especially in what appears here to be plant closing, job elimination, or merger situation, such as the employee staying until she is no longer needed.

Beth3 said:

What is that the "black black take it back" principle of at will employment. Huh? I don't have a clue what you're referring to.

Click to expand...

Its a school yard taunt/chant to justify an act of bad faith bargaining

If the termination of the relationship as described in the termination letter includes serverance after 30 days, then what grounds would they have to retract this letter, (absent any such right in the letter, contract or policy)? Because offering severance is completely voluntary and absent a bonafide contract which obligates the company to specific terms , the employer is free to change the conditions under which they're willing to provide severance as they see fit.

Click to expand...

I was responding to pattytx's blanket statement. The op did not give enough info to conclude that.

If what your saying is true then any employer almost would never pay severance. I doubt that they are paying out of kindness or goodwill... Those employers who do pay severance do in fact pay it out of goodwill. Believe it or not, employers don't enjoy putting people out of work and jeopardizing their financial security. It's quite common though for some terms to be attached to severance, especially in what appears here to be plant closing, job elimination, or merger situation, such as the employee staying until she is no longer needed.

Click to expand...

I sincerely believe employers do not enjoy putting people out of work.

Employers enjoy making money too.

If this employer attached some terms of a set number of days, what grounds do they have to change it? Other than to force the employee into a so called breech to snatch the pay that is owed.

I am not nice to waiters.

xylene said:

If this employer attached some terms of a set number of days, what grounds do they have to change it? Other than to force the employee into a so called breech to snatch the pay that is owed.

Click to expand...

Voluntary <> contract, that's why. You are free in every state of this union to change your mind.

If the termination of the relationship as described in the termination letter includes serverance after 30 days, then what grounds would they have to retract this letter, (absent any such right in the letter, contract or policy)? Because offering severance is completely voluntary and absent a bonafide contract which obligates the company to specific terms , the employer is free to change the conditions under which they're willing to provide severance as they see fit.

Click to expand...

I was responding to pattytx's blanket statement. The op did not give enough info to conclude that

Click to expand...

Excuse me, xylene, but if you're going to quote me , quote me and not somebody else. That was not my statement. Mine said

It's very possible that your severance package may be compromised. We would have no way of knowing though. You would have to talk to your HR Dept.

Click to expand...

and

I'm not saying that it isn't unfair, and you are certainly able to reopen negotiations based on this new information if your employer agrees. All I'm saying is that it is completely up to the company.

Click to expand...

A little more background info.

I was transferred from one company to another as part of an outsourcing deal. As part of the contract between the outsourcing company and my former employer, transferred employees were guaranteed a serverance package if they were laid-off within a specified period (there is now approximately 8 months left in the guarantee period). Believe me, my soon-to-be-former employer has shown no qualms about putting people out of work in the goal for higher profit margins; they are among the leaders in off-shoring U.S. jobs, but that is another story.

However, my main concern is that they can keep terminating me and then retracting or revising their termination until I end up quitting or exceeding the period for my guaranteed severance package. I also don't want to shell out cash (which I don't have) for an attorney to fight a losing battle with a billion dollar company, if there is practically no chance of success. Isn't a termination notice binding in anyway for the company?

The truth is that the only reason most of the employees have stayed around is because we are waiting for our packages.

Do you think this is worth litigating? The package would work out to around $18K pre-tax.

Thank you all for your advice.

A letter is not necessarily binding, however the contract ought to be. You will likely need to have a sit down with an employment attorney to see where you stand. If you can't find someone who offers a free consult, maybe you and the other affected employees can chip in together to schedule a meeting with one.

At worst, you could file your own suit pro se, but due to the monetary amount, you'd be in Civil Court which has much stricter rules than Small Claims and thus, takes a lot more work.